Category Archives: climate change

This helps to put things in perspective

We have had solar power technology since the 1800s. Early forms were concentrators that powered steam engines. Now we have advances in materials science, engineering, etc.

This image shows how much surface area it would take to power the World, Europe and Denmark, with current solar panel technology.


Contrast that with estimates of how much land has been ruined by tar sands, mountain top coal mining, toxic waste, etc.

Another thing to compare to would be the rough estimate of the reflective surface area required to counter the warming caused by green house gas pollution. Hint: It’s in the millions of square kilometers and it would need to be done in space.

It’s obvious to me that the Solar, Wind and other renewable energy technologies could easily do the job of providing power for our world. It’s just a matter of making the right choices.


Sid Meier’s Civilization: Beyond Earth

Looks like there soon will be an awesome new game. The trailer is also relevant for people who’ve been following the environmental crisis. It’s also pretty cool that this will be available for linux through Valve’s Steam.

Bill Nye Debates Marsha Blackburn

In case you missed the show: This is a short debate between Bill Nye (the science guy) and Marsha Blackburn (politician) that was held on Meet the press. It was a disappointing debate to me. The format was wrong for this and didn’t give Bill Nye nearly enough time to present the evidence in an informative way.

Having debated with deniers in the past, I know that you generally can’t change their minds on the subject. They either deny that it exists, call it a conspiracy or just blow it off as not being a serious problem. However, there maybe some people in the audience that are simply unaware or misinformed about the scientific evidence. In that case, the better you explain it, the more people are likely to accept climate-change as fact.

TEDx Inspirational Speaker Croix Sather – Do The Impossible

People keep telling me things like, “we can’t do that because it won’t work, it will ruin the economy or it would cost too much.” This is usually related to finding solutions to climate change. They think that transforming our energy production will somehow ruin the economy. Germany’s success in renewable energy while improving its economy is proof that it’s just not true. Others claim that if we increase the cost of fossil fuels by way of a carbon tax it will make so that people living in poverty can’t afford energy. So help the people get out of poverty. We don’t have a problem with generating wealth we just have a problem with its distribution. People who say, “I can’t” don’t accomplish much. We have to take the initiative and think positively about what we do or we’ll never get there. Yes, it will require some pain and sacrifice. We can’t afford to give up. The alternative would be a lot more painful and more costly. Just ask the insurance companies. They are losing a lot of money to costly disasters related to rising sea levels and more intense storms. Solving the problem now would be a lot cheaper than suffering the consequences later.


What Americans Don’t Get About Germany’s Renewable Energy Revolution

Munich Re – Significant Natural Catastrophes since 1980

Reponse to “Reversing Climate Change Cannot Be Accomplished Via Geoengineering: Researchers”

Since I have made a proposal for geoengineering by building a Planetary Solar Shield this article quickly got my attention.

Geoengineering the climate has been suggested as a way to help lessen the impact of climate change, but new research published in Earth System Dynamics says this approach would not likely succeed.

German researchers say that reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the planet’s surface by geoengineering may not undo climate change.

The team used a simple energy balance analysis to explain how the Earth’s water cycle responds differently to heating by sunlight than it does to warming due to a stronger atmospheric greenhouse effect. They show that this difference implies that reflecting sunlight to reduce temperatures may have unwanted effects on the Earth’s rainfall patterns.

Many geoengineering approaches try to reduce global warming by reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth’s surface. However, when the team applied their results to a geoengineering scenario like this, they found out that simultaneous changes in the water cycle and the atmosphere cannot be compensated for at the same time. This scenario would mean that reflecting sunlight by geoengineering is unlikely to restore the planet’s recent climate.

“It’s like putting a lid on the pot and turning down the heat at the same time,” Kleidon said in a statement. “While in the kitchen you can reduce your energy bill by doing so, in the Earth system this slows down the water cycle with wide-ranging potential consequences,” he says.

I agree that if you try to reduce sunlight for the whole atmosphere by spreading Aerosols you could end up with some undesirable results. We’re already experiencing disturbances in weather patterns because of warming and the melting of the Arctic. My proposal would take longer to implement but the reflecting of sunlight could be more easily controlled. It could be done just by make adjustments to the positioning and angle of the components. As I said in the post, you probably would want to situate the solar shield so that it reflects sunlight hitting one of the polar areas. They heat up much faster and they get more sunlight so the solar shield would have a much larger effect. It would be less like turning down the heat and more like moving pot so that part of it isn’t directly over the heat. You can easily experiment with this. Fill a sauce pan with water. Heat it on the stove (low or medium heat). Use a thermometer to test the temperature. When the temperature reaches the maximum possible move the pan so that about 3rd of the bottom surface area is not directly over the heating source. Wait a few minutes and take more temperature readings. This time take a reading in the center, the side closest to you and the side farthest away. If my hypothesis is correct then the water not directly over the heat source should cool down a bit and probably will reduce the average temperature of all the water a bit (after sometime being situated this way).

Another article suggest that a solar-shade could be beneficial

New research led by Carnegie’s Julia Pongratz examines the potential effects that geoengineering the climate could have on global food production and concludes that sunshade geoengineering would be more likely to improve rather than threaten food security. Their work is published online by Nature Climate Change Jan. 22.

Sometimes you have to increase the complexity of the engineering task and experiment with it in different ways to get the optimal results. I wouldn’t expect that even if the solar shield is built that we’ll return to the same climate of the previous century. By cooling the polar region(s) it might have a stabilizing effect on the weather patterns. I don’t see how anything we might do could result in returning an earlier climate situation in our history.

“It always seems impossible until it is done”
-Nelson Mandela


Sunshade Geoengineering More Likely to Improve Global Food Security, Research Suggests

How to build a planetary solar shield

Geoengineering Approaches to Reduce Climate Change Unlikely to Succeed

Climate Change: Beating around the bush won’t put out the fire

Graham Wayne is correct. We need to act to confront climate change and the sooner the better.

Small Epiphanies

There is just one reason we’re failing to address climate change. It isn’t discussed much. Nobody wants to hear about it. Nobody wants to confront it. Nobody wants to acknowledge the fundamental nature of the challenge. Yet we’re all edging closer and closer to unthinkable answers, no matter how hard we try to avoid asking the unthinkable questions.

View original post 2,203 more words